Celebs vs. Models on Magazine Covers

[lunabella]

it's alright if the celebrity used to be a model or is at least photogenic. but if the cover star is renee zellweger, that's no good.

 

[susie_bubble]

Why not enough models are on magazine covers - Interview with Alexandra Shulman

An interesting article taken from independent.co.uk

Alexandra Shulman, editor of 'Vogue', is concerned that current fashion models are not developing into magazine cover stars. She talks to Ian Burrell about her 14 years at the helm of a fashion bible
Published: 30 January 2006



Right next to the sumptuous entrance to Vogue House, in central London, is a clothes shop that purveys such finery as maid's outfits (the real thing, not the Ann Summers variety), stiff white uniforms for caterers and fluorescent ones for grafters in the construction industry.

The store is named Alexandra and there is a certain irony in that, for every morning Alexandra Shulman, the long-standing editor of Vogue magazine, must walk right past it to enter her working world. The sober workwear garments on sale in Alexandra bear little resemblance to the shiny, glitzy couture hanging from the racks in the corridors outside Shulman's office.

To be editor of Vogue means to be surrounded by the finest and newest creations of Prada, Versace and Dolce & Gabbana, to be invited to exclusive book launch parties and the openings of the latest art exhibitions, and to commission stellar photographers such as Mario Testino and supermodels such as Kate Moss. Indeed, Moss will grace the cover of Vogue next month, hair tousled and dressed in white for the new season. After her cocaine capers of last year, the supermodel could hardly have a better vehicle for furthering her rehabilitation than a title frequently referred to as 'the Bible' of the London fashion industry.

Shulman says the shoot pre-dated the Daily Mirror-inspired scandal and certainly she makes no apology for it. "There's not a huge amount of difference between the Charles Kennedy story and the Kate Moss story. It's not like everybody who needed to know didn't know. Nobody minded because they were doing their jobs fine," she observes. "Then there's a kind of exposé and everybody has to make some kind of reaction to it. I think it's a kind of hypocritical way to behave."

Aware that impressionable young women devour her magazine, she adds: "Having said that, Kate Moss is a role model to young women and I definitely feel that people should not be taking cocaine."

The appeal of a Moss cover is clear. The supermodel has helped create some of the most memorable images of Shulman's 14-year Vogue editorship and her appearance on the front of September's issue inspired the second-highest sale in the magazine's history.

Vogue has never sold better than at present (2005's combined circulation was the best annual sale ever) but you can't put Kate or Sienna (Miller, the cover girl of the current, February, edition) on the front every month. In Shulman's view, there is a distinct problem in this regard, in that the new supermodels simply aren't getting through.

"I would really like to find some new cover personalities," she says, when asked her future intentions for Vogue. "When I took over Vogue, models were on the cover. They were highly publicised, they were famous, they were successful. The main models now of the catwalk shows coming out in February, you would not recognise a single name of, and possibly in a year's time they would not be the same girls. Because there's no recognition factor it's much harder to sell magazines with models, so one's using, in the main, actresses. But the amount of actresses, well, it's the same people rolling over on all the main covers and I think it's very tedious."

Shulman says that, even as editor of British Vogue, she can do little to rectify the problem. "It's an industry problem and I think the industry is shooting itself in the foot. I feel quite strongly about this," she says. "I think one of the reasons why Kate Moss has made such a quick re-entry is because people need her. There aren't many models out there who people recognise."

She cites names such as Elise Crombez and Daria Werbowy as the current catwalk stars, names that are familiar to every fashion editor but "mean diddlypoop to the girl on the street".

For young models to grow to a level whereby their names will drive newsstand sales of magazines they need to be around for four or five seasons "to gain a sense of self", says Shulman. This is currently not happening.

The supermodel phenomenon emerged because actresses of a previous generation - the Meryl Streeps and the Jane Fondas - had no desire to be "glamorous clothes horses" and "wanted to be taken more seriously", creating a vacuum for Naomi, Cindy, Linda and the rest.

Shulman recognises that the fashion industry has recoiled from supermodels so powerful that they could call the shots. "When the model at a fashion show becomes more important than the clothes, then that is not healthy," she says. "I think the fashion industry, for some reason, is addicted to the new face."

Not that this dearth of star models has undermined Vogue's circulation. Combined sales in 2005 amounted to the magazine's most successful year ever, with the last ABC coming in at 210,000. This in spite of the emergence of a new competitor, Grazia, launched by Emap with a £16m budget, coming out every week and intended to attract upscale fashion advertising. Shulman is not dismissive of a title that is seen across the magazine industry as a success, but her initial fears of fierce competition have not materialised because sales figures show that "people who were buying Vogue are not buying Grazia instead".

"Before it came on the market, I was concerned about it," she concedes. "Now I see it's a completely different beast and is merely a very polished, celebrity and high street rehash magazine. I think probably they've had to change. Probably what they wanted to do they haven't been able to do. They haven't been able to be the high-end fashion magazine they wanted to be and they've had to fit into a different slot in the market place."

 

[susie_bubble]

Cont.

Next month, Shulman will have to contend with the relaunch of Harpers & Queen as Harper's Bazaar. She anticipates that the National Magazine Company will attempt to take some of Vogue's market share but believes the change will be mainly in the name. Not that she is complacent. "Every time there's a new launch, I take it very seriously," she says. "I don't sit at the top of my ivory tower and say: 'We don't have to worry about anyone else.' "
Shulman, 47, is the daughter of the former London Evening Standard theatre critic Milton Shulman and Drusilla Beyfus, the writer and former editor of Brides magazine. She was first published in Vogue while still a student in Brighton, filing a piece on "Sussex style" from a university then still thought of as radical. Her dream, though, was to work in the music business and she went to work in A&R for Arista before being fired five months later.
"I don't think as a personality I was completely ideal for the music business. It was the product I liked," says Shulman, still a regular gig-goer ("Moby at Brixton Academy, John Prine at the Bush").
She entered the world of magazines as a secretary for Shirley Lowe, editor of Over 21. "I really got a sense of what the job was about and the immense pleasure she got. I didn't want to work for magazines particularly, but seeing her I thought: 'Maybe I do.' "
She began to write more and landed a job on Tatler, where she worked with the likes of Craig Brown, Jonathan Meades, Libby Purves and Tina Brown. Her biggest inspiration was the editor Mark Boxer, who at first she didn't get on with. "It was personal reasons. I had known him in another context," she says. "When Mark came to the magazine, his main objective was to make me resign."
Thus Boxer was much pleased with the suggestion in one editorial meeting that Shulman should be assigned to go on a date with one Luis Basualdo, a man-about-town known in Tatler circles simply as "the Bounder". Shulman recalls that it was "literally a piece that changed my life". The pair met at The Ritz, where Basualdo was staying, and then, at the Bounder's suggestion, headed on to Wiltons, the Jermyn Street game restaurant. "It was a good Tatler piece," says Shulman of her article. "No, I don't think I did agree that he was a bounder."
Apart from winning Boxer's admiration, the piece gave Shulman a new confidence which helped her into the world of newspapers, becoming woman's page editor of Peregrine Worsthorne's Sunday Telegraph in 1987.
She was seduced back to magazines by the lure of the features editor's job on Vogue and the glamour of the West End. "I wanted to get away from Canary Wharf, I really hated it," she says of her commute. "Someone took me out to lunch round the corner from here and I had forgotten there was such a thing as a really nice West End restaurant."
She does regret not having lingered in Fleet Street. "I would have liked to have done it for longer. I didn't feel I had done everything I could have done," she says.
But the experience did sharpen her news antennae. "My journalist background has made me aware of the powers of the press and the desire to be part of the dialogue that goes on and to extend it outside the fashion industry," she says. "I think publicity helps us a lot. We don't really have a big marketing judgement and you can see a direct correlation between publicity in the newspapers and sales trajectory. Last year when we photographed [Wayne Rooney's girlfriend] Coleen McLoughlin, it was a good story and I was pleased with it, but if we hadn't had the intense newspaper coverage we did, not many people would have known it was there."
Her rise at Vogue was interrupted by the opportunity to edit another Condé Nast title, GQ. Shulman, who takes her young son to QPR matches, had no problem running a men's magazine and was much liked by her staff. She may have had "no idea" whether a piece about Formula 1 was accurate, but she knew if it was interesting.
"My GQ didn't have women on the cover, it was much more steeped in the traditions of the old Esquire," she says. "It's much more racy now and more commercial, but the tone isn't different, there's still a quite humorous, intelligent tone."
Shulman's Vogue, she hopes, is "a magazine of record of contemporary culture and style". But just as she is frustrated by the lack of new cover stars, she complains that there are "too few good writers".
She is an instinctive editor ("I will make decisions very much on the hoof") and has held the competition at bay for more than a decade. It's not a bad life. "You can't possibly do it all. Are you going to the big exhibition at the Tate, or the book launch or the launch of the new Armani fragrance? Every night there is all of that happening. Sometimes I love it, you get to dip into all those worlds and by the end of the night you think: 'God, I've met so many people,' " she says.
Even the long-running arguments over her magazine's use of skinny teenage models or fur coats give her a thrill from being at the centre of debate.
"Vogue gets a lot of publicity and what we do people pay attention to, so consequently we are a sitting duck when someone wants to fill a column with a quick paragraph. I would prefer it that way," she says. "It's the thing that has kept me here this long, the fact that people do pay attention and it does have a power. That's a fantastic thing to have."

Taken from independent.co.uk

 

[L.A.Gant]

Thanks for posting Interesting article, gives a bit of perspective on some of the challenges fashion editors are faced when planning a cover among other things.... I guess the bottom line dictates whether an actress or model is put on the cover which leaves a magazine without much choice.

 

[pink_lipgloss]

wow, thank you for posting that article. Very interesting.

 

[eternitygoddess]

I prefer CELEBRITIES. Not many people are curious about high-fashion models at present. I would rather buy a magazine with Nicole Kidman on the cover than one with Natalia V.

Celebrities are the rage. Although you may argue that Vogue, Elle, Bazaar are fashion magazines, right who's the biggest influence of fashion? Hollywood! Everyone looks to celebrities to see what the latest fashon trends are. Fashion coverage at awards ceremonies are huge.

 

[lacy99]

I think it's funny that Alexandra Shulman said "diddlypoop".

 

[Label Basher]

I personally don't care if UK Vogue & Harpers Bazaar nee Queen put celebs on the cover because they mix it up with celebs & models (last year they only had 3 celeb vogue covers Cate, Natalie & Gwyneth which means there was 9 months of models). So for me they are doing a good job and I hope it doesn't change.

Whereas US Vogue & Bazaar are the bad eggs (not to mention US Elle, Glamour & Allure). It's celeb covers after celeb cover and it gets boring and they aren't even very good shots.

The US versions need to learn how to mix it up and remember they have 12 issues and there is no reason why you can't still have a celeb interview inside.

 

[MissMagAddict]

An ed from US Vogue talks a bit about Models vs Celebs in the article. Hopefully it is OK to post in this forum. I wasn't quite sure where to post it. Anyway...Mods please remove if not OK.

Time Is Right for New Supermodel to Emerge By
SAMANTHA CRITCHELL, AP Fashion Writer Fri Feb 3, 2:18 PM ET

Who'll be the next Cindy, Naomi or Kate? Will there ever be another Cindy, Naomi or Kate — all supermodels simply known by their first names? (Crawford, Campbell and Moss, for those with short memories.)
Young catwalkers with dreams of being the next big thing begin an eight-day audition Friday at New York Fashion Week.
The industry is ripe for a sensation because it's been five years — a lifetime in the fashion world — since the last household name: Gisele (Bundchen).
But even if a model breaks away from the tall, leggy pack in New York, she still has to impress in Paris and Milan, Italy. Then she has to score some choice magazine spreads and ad campaigns — something that's become increasingly difficult to do as actresses such as Angelina Jolie, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Teri Hatcher consistently grace the covers of glossy magazines and hawk the fashion and beauty products that used to be models' bread and butter.
In September 2004, Vogue — the fashion industry's bible — put nine familiar-but-not-famous models on its cover and heralded the return of the fashion model.
Unfortunately, says Kate Armenta, the magazine's sittings editor, the theory didn't prove true.
"The tide is really toward the celebrity culture right now. Models have taken on a different role. ... Gisele is well known but she's known more for Victoria's Secret or dating Leonardo DiCaprio, not by what ad campaigns she's been in," she says.
Nian Fish, creative director and senior vice president at KCD, which produces shows for top fashion houses, says that's kept new talent from being developed into the next generation of fashion stars.
"It's like how reality television takes away from actors, celebrities take away from models," she says.
Runway regulars Caroline Trentini and Jessica Stam are pretty successful by industry standards but most average Joes would never recognize them on the street.
Contrary to popular belief, not all models are carted around in limos while wearing chic dresses and high heels. Outside the Bryant Park tents where many of Fashion Week's runway shows are held, it's a common sight to see pretty young things smoking cigarettes in jeans and sneakers looking remarkably unremarkable as they try to hail a cab to beat the audience to the next show.
To achieve top-tier status — the ones who are chauffeured from show to show while carrying handbags that cost more than startup models' monthly rent — you need more than a pretty face.
Fish ticks off what matters more:
• Bone structure.
• Shape of head in proportion to body. (The classic fashion illustration of a small head and long body is indeed what the industry looks for.)
• How she looks in clothes.
• Her "hunger."

"There's definitely work to this," Fish says. "Maybe you're not building a log cabin, but there's a lot of psychological wear and tear. They'll hear, `You lost weight,' or `You gained weight.' And you can't read the stares (of) the casting directors. All that, coupled with the tremendously long hours, which can be 6 a.m. to 2 a.m. if she's one of the working girls of the season."
Some models develop the passion — and, maybe even more importantly, confidence — after a special moment on the runway or an ego boost from one top designer or photographer who lights the spark for "the wildfire effect," Fish says.
Before that, though, aspiring models have to find an agency willing to bring them to the attention of casting directors. They're the ones who can see up to 500 models during the weeding-out process, out of which a handful make it to a session with the designers and creative directors.
"A certain number of girls will start in New York City and get the good shows. The shows go immediately online. Then one or two models will start getting buzz, whether they do Marc (Jacobs), Calvin (Klein) or Karl (Lagerfeld), then they go on to a cool show in Milan and then THE show in Paris. ...Daria (Werbowy) was the most recent wildfire," Fish says.
Armenta from Vogue says Werbowy came at the right time. "I'd seen pictures and heard of her, but when (Steven) Meisel shot her for Prada, it blew her out of the water. She was unique. She had such presence. She's so gorgeous and unique but not in an off-putting way."
Occasionally, it's the shy girl who perseveres. Fish predicts Heather Bratton, who did the Chanel, Chloe and Burberry Prorsum shows last season and was then shot by Meisel for Italian Vogue, will have "an amazing season."
Meanwhile, Armenta has her eye on Snejana Onopka, who has been photographed for American Vogue a few times since her turn on the Louis Vuitton, Valentino and Chanel runways last fall.
The models not only have to look good in clothes but also "fit" them, says Ivan Bart, senior vice president of IMG Models, which represents Werbowy, Bundchen, Moss and Jacquetta Wheeler.
Again using Werbowy, now the spokesmodel for Lancome, as the example, Bart notes that she had the hippie-chic look when everything coming down the runway had a bohemian style.
"The main thing is the designers are always looking for the woman who best suits the collection, but, that being said, they always want a sure thing," he says. "The bottom line through all of it is selling clothes."
It makes sense that designers first look at models with a paper trail of fashion advertisements because practice makes perfect, Bart says, just like with any craft.
And it pays to be nice and easygoing. It's hard for anyone — including designers, casting directors, photographers, the audience and consumers — not to like an approachable, friendly person, Bart says. "Taking fashion shows out of the equation, when you're booked for a five-day trip on a remote location for a shoot, would a photographer, stylist, etc., want to be with you? You have to connect to people," he says. "You can't be too demanding or diva-ish anymore, not in 2006. ... If you're not in the best form and giving and excited to be here, there are a lot of other people who are happy to do your job."

 

[L.A.Gant]

An ed from US Vogue talks a bit about Models vs Celebs in the article. Hopefully it is OK to post in this forum. I wasn't quite sure where to post it. Anyway...Mods please remove if not OK.

Interesting article... I've read over and over again how hard it is these days to be a model let alone aspiring to be a top model with impact on the industry. Thanks for posting

 

[Hard Core Dior]

Models vs Actresses

So, who do you prefer in your magazine covers, actresses or models?

I usually prefer models and it disappoints me how every magazine is using actresses now. Apparently it's because it sells more, at least that's what Vogue said when I wrote them a bitchy email.

We do occasionally have models on the cover but the fact is that in recent years celebrities on covers sell more magazines than do models.

Phyllis Rifield
Vogue Information

 

[blues]

I thought glamour finally got it right when they put Ale on their cover a few months back, but I guess they didn't. But again put the same old boring actresses back on. I'm getting real tired of Jessica simpson, and the likes. Lets have more of Ale, Ana, Isabeli, Gianne Albertoni who was just on Vogue Brazil, Izabel Goulart, Anja Rubik, Marija Vujovic just to name a few.They are much more exotic, interesting and fashionable.

 

[TheGlassAngel]

I definitely prefer models. It's their job to on magazines, it's their territory.

 

[jakeee]

agreedddd

bring the models back!!!

 

[Spiral1532]

Up until Linda Evangelista was on the cover of the August issue of Vogue, only actresses had been on the cover for a whole year. WTF? Vogue is supposed to be a fashion magazine.

 

[Whitelinen]

I am definetily bothered by this trend. I can't come up with any reason for celebrities to have a lot for covers...

Hollywood might be a big inspiration for people, but personally not for me. I don't love any celebrity's style to death, and there are very few who interest me at all. I wouldn't mind if the whole celebrity culture would just vanish. I wouldn't justify a trend to be right just because it is big, therefore I do not think this is a good thing that magazines should pursue.

I don't like "knowing" the person who's in the cover. Each celebrity has a certain image, and they are in the covers to promote their image. The way a model does covers is quite different: a model takes the image that the photographer/magazine wants to have for their cover and makes it her own for that one cover. Model's work is to morph and fulfill the photographer's/designer's theme, not to promote their own image (with the exception of Supers and people like Gisele who are more like celebrities).

Models are beautiful/photogenic. Celebrities rarely are, or at least lack a lot of that talent compared to models. I know that a lot of today's celebrities are ex-models, but then it's the image thing again.

Sadly it seems to be that everyone wants celebrities, everyone needs celebrities and everyone buys celebrities.

I've myself started to boycott celebrity covers, and won't buy any fashion magazines with a celebrity in the cover. I'm deadly bored by them.

Ps. In the 90s even magazines like Elle had a lot of model covers...maybe due to the Super-trend, but not all of them were well-known.

 

[Erin]

IMHO its part of a general dumbing down of some of the major fashion magazines. For a number of mags the emphasis is no longer on setting trends and are just following the 'celeb is everything' mantra in desperate pursuit of circulation.

I really think it's about money...

I prefer CELEBRITIES. Not many people are curious about high-fashion models at present. I would rather buy a magazine with Nicole Kidman on the cover than one with Natalia V.

Celebrities are the rage. Although you may argue that Vogue, Elle, Bazaar are fashion magazines, right who's the biggest influence of fashion? Hollywood! Everyone looks to celebrities to see what the latest fashon trends are. Fashion coverage at awards ceremonies are huge.

I am with you. Celebrities for me... they're entirely more relatable... and much more mainstream, so there's much more of a chance for viewers, movie-goers, concert-goers to develop a liking to them.

 

[iluvjeisa]

I really think it's about money...

I am with you. Celebrities for me... they're entirely more relatable... and much more mainstream, so there's much more of a chance for viewers, movie-goers, concert-goers to develop a liking to them.

Well, I can certainly not relate to many celebrities.

Since we didn't have celebs covers before but we do now, the money argument does not make sense. Why wasn't it all about the money before? Of course it was, so what has changed, really? Is it just simply that they're out of tricks of how to raise the profits? There's an example of a Swedish music magazine, rather revered a few years ago, which slipped into soft p*rn and is now all about the T&A and hardly even mentions music. I guess that's the way we're headed here, except in this context it will be the celeb that is selling themselves best at the moment, with no regard for their persona or photogenic properties. The least common denominator determines the covers in order to attract the most people with little concern about the purpose and image of the magazine.

The cover is no longer an an avatar of the magazine itself, it is thought of as a tool to attract the tools out there. Only, of course, it really is an avatar of the content and it is an immediate measurement of the extent to which the editors are selling out.

 

[larien]

i prefer models but you know magazines putting celebs on covers to sell because they are known better than the models.everyone is not close to models life as much as we are and they're not even know the name of many models that have editorials in the magazines just looking the clothes and passing it

 

[John Black]

MODELS, MODELS and more MODELS on fashmag covers please!!! I am fed up with all the celebs - they are all over.